coke12

If it was truly “so many companies” then they wouldn’t be in this situation… reading between the lines here it’s clear Deno was not a successful project.

Obviously so. Raytheon is a private company that has its own equities to consider: including things like public image, legal liability, etc. The idea that the USG says jump and Raytheon says how high is absurd. They make choices and even advise the USG at times.

The Epsom salt meme predates your “Web 3.0” thesis by many decades. I have no idea if it’s true but it’s not indicative of any new trend.

Comparing SpaceX to an aircraft leasing company seems more foolish to me than a 94x multiple.

I understand the gist here, but come on. This is a generational company. It’s the only relevant space launch business, and has its tentacles deep in AI infrastructure as well. Maybe the AI bet is foolish — I don’t know — you should short it!

They have deep synergies in the collectibles market. There's a Venn diagram with eBay on one side and Gamestop on the other, and cultural characters like Logan Paul with his $16m Pokemon card right in the intersection.

This is a big market getting bigger. Americans have more spending money than ever before, especially at the top end, and the collectibles market is expected to grow as much as 7% y/y for a long time. That's like $50b of new spend every year. Massive opportunity.

I think this is smart. Gamestop is a vibes company, everyone knows it, and this is an opportunity to acquire a real business with strong tailwinds. Everyone knows eBay has been poorly run for 20 years. Even in 2010/2011 when I worked there it was running on empty so to speak. Some opportunity to take control of that narrative and grow the business in demographics with deep pockets would be huge.

What about human cheese?

He was well known in the first Trump admin.

No, reading verbatim from a technical paper is way too dense. You need a lot of filler words to slow it down and repetition to make it stick when read aloud.

Every group want to label some outgroup as naively benefiting from AI. For programmers, apparently it's the pointy haired bosses. For normies, it's the programmers.

Be careful of this kind of thinking, it's very satisfying but doesn't help you understand the world.

Anecdotally I have bought 2 switches over its lifetime and never saw any of this ever. Just clicked “buy” on Amazon.

I don’t know, I’ve been involved in computer science for several decades now and cellular automata hasn’t really lost its charm. Seems like a cool thing to dedicate your life to!

Many sites do something like that in practice. The problem is the extra 500ms of parse+eval time for your JS bundle influences user behavior a lot on the margin, so it’s better to not force the user to wait.

Ultimately the choice of platform is about trust rather than capability. Apple has been a much better citizen historically than any of the smart TV companies.

The description/assessment of tasks is all plausible, but agreed, some of the execution can be surprisingly boneheaded :)

Case in point, I am building a cellular automata-based physics system, and there is seemingly nothing I can do to affirm that row 0 is "down" and row 255 is "up". The system just cannot grok it on a consistent basis. It has the ability to take screenshots, write unit tests, etc, it's just blind to the kind of intuitive logic we get with our human world model. So the code frequently regresses and gravity starts going in the wrong direction.

Coincidentally I am also writing a cellular automata simulation. I've blindly given your article to my software architect subagent, who has identified several architectural improvements that it can make and has converted these into tasks to farm out to other subagents. Thanks!

Just a glimpse from building software in 2025.